phunkdaddy said:

Chancellor said:

The Judge allowed the Deadlocked Jurors to deliberate for days in hopes of wearing them out...All they had to talk about in the Jury-room was Heresay & one person's word against another...There was NO solid evidence...Just because someone accuses you of Drugging & Molesting them does not mean their Word is Gospel...If the accuser chose not to go to the Emergency Room or Doctor's Care and go through the Rape-Kit procedure then that's their bad judgment...If the accuser did not go to the Cops then that's their bad judgment...

13yrs later and this is where you're at...

The Accusers are NOT going after Cosby because he violated them. The Accusers want Cosby's Head because a Comedian made National News when he joked about Bill's drugging accusation during a Comedy show...Gloria The Hound promised the Accusers a BIG pay day or a Court date..Bill was not gonna pay them Shit so they settled for a Court Date...

and Twitter's reaction was a Complete & Total farce...The Majority of Whites chimed in about Bill Cosby and the mistrial but they did not have Shit to say about Philando Castile.

^^^^

Guilt cannot be presumed without absolute proof. Not saying Mr. Cosby is innocent.

I didn't know who the hell Hannibal Burress was before his comedy show. Many people still

don't know who he is.

Sorry but that is not true. Guilt is a legal term that is not always consistent with reality. And it is not nor has it ever required absolute proof. What is required is beyond a reasonable doubt. But then again what that means can get a little squishy.

I did not follow this case so I do not know what the jury was told to consider. I do not know if his prior admission of drugging women was allowed or not. But that would go a long way to convince me.


As to the mistrial: seems to be a case of "not guilty be reason of celebrity"